|
Quit aware of the telecomm industry; spent 21 years in buried in techie detail as an engineer and had a ton of fun. Not sure the overall programming community would agree with real-time vs productivity assessment; lots of folks out there writing production systems on Win32 systems that have rather tight real-time requirements.
-----Original Message----- Any of the more current Win32 systems can be programmed to handle nearreal-time events (eg, sip, rtp) just like linux, bsd, and other O/S's.Obviously, Call Manager is one such system. It's really not an O/Sreligious war/discussion, but rather a lack of knowledge (on any O/Sthat a poster might not be familiar with) on how to design/implement it in code. With that said, porting the low level drivers (zaptel, wctdm, etc) fromlinux to Win32 is no where near a trevial task, and would basicallyinvolve a complete rewrite of such code. Since there are very fewpeople (maybe one or two) that truly understand _all_ the interworkings of the linux-zaptel drivers, and, I venture to guess those same peopleare not even remotely cognizant (no offense intended at all) of howto write Win32 drivers, don't look for asterisk to be fully portedto the Win32 environment any time soon. As far as I'm concerned, thereisn't any real justification to do so either. A pbx is intended to be a near real-time system and as such should nothave programmers/technicians mucking with it in a production environment.That also suggests that any form of GUI interface that is resident inpbx s/w is not only not required, but not desirable as it will lead tosomeone mucking with it and impacting availability. Running a GUIinterface via a manager (cti or whatever) interface that is not part ofthe real-time pbx environment certainly is doable and has been done onlots of pbx and central office switches over the years regardless of what the underlying O/S happens to be on the switch. Those companies that have implemented near real-time systems have probablyquestioned their choice of O/S years after deploying production systems,but that's perfect 20-20 hindsight. Cisco (as only one example) tends to purchase the majority of their non-core products from other companies (or purchase the entire company), and in a fair number of cases, will attempt to enhance/port that product to something different generating significantly more negatives then ifthey would have left the product alone. I'd be one that would certainlystay away from the port of CCM on another O/S for at least a year. Rich
|
_______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
